CENTENARY OF ESTABLISHMENT OF NT SUPREME COURT 30MAY2011

George Cridland representing The Law Society of the Northern Territory

A number of sobering thoughts have occurred to me in the lead-up to these proceedings. I hasten to add that I intend to do my utmost to remedy this outbreak of sobriety at the refreshments following this Sitting.

The first of these thoughts was that it is now 20 years since I last addressed this Court on the occasion of the closing down in 1991 of the previous Supreme Court building on the corner of Mitchell and Herbert Streets and the move to these premises. This occurred shortly after the appointment to the Bench of Mr Justice Mildren

That was a rather light-hearted occasion - the more so since it took place immediately after a convivial lunch. I recognise that this is a somewhat more serious occasion and, therefore, will make no references - as I did then - to a certain mythical member of the Bench, a Mr Justice Dieldren, or to a scheme for productivity-based pay for judges based on the promptness of delivery of judgments.

Another thought was that it is a little over 40 years since I last addressed this Court as an Advocate. It occurred to me that it could become somewhat tedious for me to be rushing up to the Court every 20 years or so for an appearance and that - if I get another gig in 20 years time - I will be doddering up to the Court clutching a congratulatory telegram from the head Royal Personage of the day or perhaps even from the President of Australia.

Perhaps the most sobering thought of all was that I have been associated with this Court now for over one half of the period of its existence - having come to Darwin then a town of about 10,000 people in December 1955 - about 55½ years ago - as Associate to Mr Justice Kriewaldt. My very first Supreme Court case following admission, in February 1959, was to defend an Aboriginal on a charge of murder arising out of a knifing incident at a card game at Bagot - Tiger Lyons and Dick Ward were both still on holidays so the defence fell to me. Although, as a one-man firm, I practised extensively before the Court for several years, and have been a litigant on a few occasions, for most of those 55 years my association with the Court has been merely as an admitted Practitioner of the Court.

Over its 100 years, the Court has had five different locations. From 1911 to 1942 it was situated in the 1884-built stone building on the Esplanade. Over and immediately following the War years from 1942 to 1948 it was based in Alice Springs. From 1948 to 1965 it operated from a set of Sidney Williams huts on the Esplanade - "temporary premises" which endured for 17 years.

The Courthouse on the corner of Mitchell and Herbert Streets was officially opened in 1965. It had a rather long gestation period. I recall Mr Justice Kriewaldt carrying on a lengthy correspondence with the architects about the design in my time with him which ended in June 1958. The official opening by the then Commonwealth Attorney-General, Billy Snedden, was the occasion of an amusing prank. As many of you will recall the façade of the Court carried a sculpture of ‘Justice' with one arm across his body and the other arm aloft administering justice to a kneeling supplicant. Someone had scaled the façade and placed a large serving napkin on the horizontal arm and a tray with bottles and glasses on the raised arm. As I recollect, Billy Snedden though it was an "amusing but childish prank".

And now the Court has been situated in these salubrious premises for 20 years and they should last for a good while yet.

It is interesting to note that at one period of its existence - 1927-1931, the Court endeavoured to emulate the Holy Trinity by existing as a "Judicial Duality". The Commonwealth Northern Australia Act 1926 divided the Northern Territory into two Territories - the Territories of Northern Australia and Central Australia. The Supreme Court then existed as the Supreme Court of Northern Australia and the Supreme Court of Central Australia with the same Judge. The Court only ever sat in Darwin as Alice Springs was considered "too small and too remote". In 1931 the Northern Territory was reconstituted as one Territory.

I suppose the period of my closest involvement with the Court was during my 2½ years as Associate to Judge Kriewaldt. In the latter half of 1958, leading up to my admission as a Barrister of the Supreme Court of Queensland, I sought employment with the firm of R.C.Ward for the purpose of finding out how a solicitor's office worked - in those days. I might add that my Admission Fee of £50 was financed by a loan from the Judge, promptly repaid with interest in the amount of one bottle of scotch.

The life of the Court in those days was pretty relaxed. Criminal sittings were held regularly and the list was not very extensive. Civil cases could be brought on quickly, whenever the parties were ready to proceed, undefended divorces by a phone call, there was the occasional application for a Prerogative Writ - usually in respect of licensing matters and the occasional substantial matter of interest, eg. the noted Admiralty case concerning the MV. Rose Pearl featuring a youthful Laurence Street as junior to Jack Smythe QC.

Much has been written about Judge Kriewaldt and his contribution to understanding and dealing with Aboriginal accused and witnesses in criminal proceedings and I would not presume to attempt to add to it here. When I joined him he was in regular receipt of congratulatory correspondence from the USA following the Chambers brothers Aboriginal whipping case in December 1955.

An American friend who had done a year at the University of Queensland sent me a clipping of an article in January 1956 by Robert Ruark, a noted columnist, in the San Francisco News headed "Australian Judge proves There Can Be Real Justice". In the article he bemoaned the acquittal, despite evidence heavily against them, of the suspected killers of a Negro boy, killed for wolf-whistling a white woman.

He goes on:

"And then I think of a white Australian Judge dealing in court with the greatest white supremacy against the smallest black minority, who has the courage to put reasonably rich white ranchers in gaol on the principle of equality and justice for all.

I say that this is probably the only country in the world today where this could happen, and Australia and the world might be truly proud of Mr Justice Kriewaldt of Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia."

It was related to me that when Kriewaldt arrived in the Territory as Acting Judge in 1951, on his first appearance in Court he was attired in all the splendour of the red robes - something never witnessed in the Territory before. I am told that the redoubtable Tiger Lyons was heard to mutter - not so sotto voce - "Jesus Christ - Father Christmas". Tiger in full flight at the Bar table after lunch, was a sight to behold. Large of frame, florid of countenance, wig askew, the bottom of his shirt agape to reveal a cavernous navel. On one occasion he bullied a witness so badly that the Judge literally ‘flounced' off the Bench slamming his Chambers door behind him.

I recall on one occasion Tiger's pleadings revealed a somewhat novel legal doctrine. He acted for a number of insurance companies, including the London, Liverpool and Globe which was represented in the Territory by a Resident Inspector. One of his Statements of Claim included a paragraph stating: "The Plaintiff will say that the doctrine of the Resident Inspector loquitur applies". This was of course an error in shorthand transcription by his secretary and indicated a somewhat cursory, if any, checking of the document by Tiger.

I might add that Dick Ward subsequently filed a Defence, a paragraph of which stated somewhat tongue-in-cheek, "The Defendant will say that there is no such doctrine in law as "the Resident Inspector loquitur".

Kriewaldt was at pains to maintain the majesty of the law to the extent, again I am told as it was before my time, that he sat, I think at Anthony Lagoon Station - on some cattle duffing case (the details escape me) - Exhibit 1, consisting of a large number of cattle, being kept in the yards there - fully attired in wig and red robes. I was also told that for many years after the local Aboriginals incorporated into their corroboree repertoire one featuring "that white fellow judge in big red dress with flour-bag longa head".

The amenities of the Court and the Judge's Chambers were in those days almost as far from the relatively luxurious hermetically sealed judicial environment of today as a stockman's camp is to the Hilton Hotel.

Air-conditioning was unknown. All public servants were equipped with their own pedestal fans located under the fronts of their desks to direct a stream of air onto them via their nether regions. The Judge had an overhead fan in his Chambers and over the Bench and there was another over the Bar table. With the elevation of the Bench there was disconcertingly little clearance between the Judge's head and the fan when he stood up on entering and leaving the Bench. I venture to think that Austin Asche may have been in serious trouble.

Of an afternoon the atmosphere in the Court was decidedly soporific. On more than one occasion I gave the Judge a bum steer on being rudely awakened with a request for the number of the next exhibit.

It fell to me as Associate to swear in or affirm witnesses and I well recall the pidgin admonition used, (I would not call it an affirmation) for Aboriginal witnesses. It was not quite as elaborate as that of Magistrate Nicholls as outlined in Mr Justice Mildren's book, but broadly similar and delivered with suitable sternness of countenance and - I suspect - to the bewilderment of the witness.

There was one bizarre concession to the Judge's comfort in that at 8:30 every morning a tall, elderly Aboriginal known as Big Arm Charlie would enter the Judge's chambers, flush the toilet and remove any frogs which may otherwise have threatened the judicial dignity.

When I commenced practice in January 1959 the legal profession in Darwin consisted of seven practitioners - three private one-man firms and four lawyers in the Commonwealth Crown Solicitor's office one of whom was the Legislative Council Draftsman. I shudder to think of the number that a census would now reveal, especially given all the additional legal bodies that have grown up over the years.

Perhaps I should add to the list of "sobering thoughts" the fact that, as far as I can see, the only "survivors" of practice in the Sydney Williams Court are myself, my former partner Harry Bauer, who succeeded me as Associate to Judge Kriewaldt and a succession of acting judges, and who retired about three years ago, having returned to the Bar after 20 years as a Judge of the NSW Industrial Commission, and Mr Justice Gallop, then Crown Prosecutor and civil litigator for the Commonwealth. We did battle on several occasions.

The firm of G.W. Cridland Barrister & Solicitor has had a total of four subsequent incarnations going first to Cridland Bauer & Rorrison, then to Cridland & Bauer, then to Cridlands and now to CridlandsMB.

I recall along the way seeking to recruit a promising young lawyer named Trevor Riley. I don't know if he remembers it but as I recall I visited him at his home - I think it was Douglas Street, Fannie Bay - only to learn that Ward Keller had got there first.

It is very pleasing to note that in spite of that missed opportunity he seems to have done alright for himself.

I don't think that there are many, in fact probably any, who would concur with the views of the Lord Chancellor in Iolanthe that,

"The Law is the true embodiment of everything that's excellent. It has no kind of fault or flaw and I, my Lords, embody the Law."

By and large lawyers get extremely bad press and this is not always deserved. I recall years ago coming across a little rhyme:

"He saw a lawyer killing a viper on a dunghill close by his own stable
and the Devil smiled for it put him in mind of Cain and his brother, Abel."

More recently there was an interesting article by Sydney Morning Herald columnist, Richard Ackland, commenting on the retirement of Chief Justice Spigelman and lamenting the fact that "In many ways he leaves the Court as he found it." He goes on in his opening comments:

"Justice is as inaccessible to the ordinary citizen as ever before. Costs have not been contained. Litigation groans under the weight of larger trolley loads of documents. Closed hearings and suppression orders are not unusual. The Court's communication skills are under-resourced and out-moded. The registry gives the distinct impression that it does not like to be disturbed with enquiries or requests for information. For the media to look at a file is usually an impossibility or certainly involves a torturous process of applications hemmed in by brick walls."

I note, however, that recently the newly appointed Chief Justice Bathurst has stated his intention to strive to make justice more accessible and the Commonwealth Attorney-General Robert McClelland has defended lawyers, pointing to the extensive pro bono work undertaken without publicity.

Reform in any area is usually painfully slow but great advances have been made and hopefully will continue apace.

So - me and the Court - we've been together now for 55 years. It has been an interesting time and there is no doubt that we've both changed out of all recognition. It only remains for me on behalf of the Law Society and myself personally to congratulate the Court on the anniversary of its birth and to wish it well.